UNHCR IOM MCC Report on risks faced by refugees and migrants on the Central Mediterranean route

Good afternoon everyone and thank you for your for your patience.

I'm sorry we're starting a few minutes late, but we'd like to welcome you to this embargoed press briefing today on the launch of a new UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, IOM, the International Organisation for Migration and the Mixed Migration Centre report that is being launched.

Official launches tomorrow, Friday, 5th of July at 5:00 in the morning, Central European summertime.

So we are very honoured to bring you a panel today to discuss the report and take out questions.

We have here with me Vonsant Koschatel, which is who is Unhcr's Special Envoy for the Western and Central Mediterranean situation.

We also have Mr.

Lawrence Hart who is the Director at the Coordination Office for the Mediterranean for IOM and we also have Mr.

Brown Frows who is the director of the Mixed Migration Centre.

So we will go over to to each of our our guests to tell you a bit more about the report.

Just to say, hopefully all of all of you who are joining us online and in person should have received the report and embargo as well as an advisory.

Please do let us know in case you haven't received that or in case you have any questions and would be happy to follow up with you on that.

I think that's it.

So without further ado, let's go over.

Maybe we start with Vansant.

Vansant, maybe do you want to talk to us a bit about the report?

Yes, thank you, Shabia.

Good afternoon, everyone.

Well, first of all, I think it's important that to know that it's the second iteration of that report.

We had a similar report with the Mixed Migration Centre 4 years ago and it includes a survey from interviews that took place between 2000, last report in in 2020 until now on various other sources.

I have to stay when I embark into this study with with the two other organisation with IOM and MMC.

I was fearing a bit to see what would be the finding.

I can't get you.

I've been six years on this position.

I can't get used to the type of testimonies we we receive on a daily basis.

And unfortunately the findings in that report reveal a **** degree of protection risk around those routes that lead to the Central Mediterranean Sea.

But when I talk about the routes to the Central Mediterranean Sea, they are not unilat unidirectional routes.

Some of them are going also to the South and they are not all directed towards the north of Africa.

And you were aware recently, I mean a few weeks, a couple of weeks ago, we, we, there was a discovery of 65 bodies in Aishwarya area, which is in southwest of Libya.

This is a testimony of of the many deaths we see on the road on that are going unreported.

Regardless of their status, migrants, refugees seem to face serious human rights violation on ***** along the route.

We distinguish ***** from violation using that legal terminology.

***** is by non state actors whereas violation is by state authorities.

A total of more than 32,000 people have been in interviewed.

So it's a huge body of evidence.

You know, sometimes states are telling us, well, expulsions don't happen, detention is not happening.

You know, yes, there are instances of trafficking, but not that many on the road.

You can dismiss 12345 isolated testimonies.

You cannot dismiss the body of evidence of having interviewed 32,000 people.

What is the main difference between this report on on the first one?

Well, one of the significant difference in this report, IOM has been a partner and brings additional data, additional tools, their own methodology in, in, in getting the information we needed to get.

So the sample surveyed moved from 16,000 to almost 32,000 people and we have a larger proportion of women being interviewed, 34%.

The interview took place also in different location, Burkina Faso, Guinea, Italy, Libya, Mali, Niger, Sudan, Tunisia.

They could not take place in some places where we would have liked to have those interviews just because it's not possible, states don't want us to interview or we don't have access to those areas.

What we see also is that certainly among the what the methodology we've used has enabled us to geolocate the place where the dangers and the protection incidents seem to be the most serious ones.

And again, we have developed in the report couple of maps that help us to locate where the danger are.

For us as humanitarian aid agency, it's quite critical because we need to make sure the services, not just the services we offer directly through our partners, but the services that are available by the national authorities, by the local authorities are located where the risk are the most acute.

This is not to facilitate the movement of people, it is not to encourage people to embark in dangerous journey, is to find protection solution to the to address the ***** and the violation they suffer.

Physical violence is the main risk reported by 38% of the respondent.

It's quite interesting to see the way some of the new risks are appearing in this second report.

For instance, before the risk of death was reported by 14% of the respondent, now it's by 20% of the respondent.

Many people tell us that they are aware of someone who has died on the way and normally more on the land routes that on the sea routes.

The risk of sexual gender based violence has also increased to 15%.

It was 12.5% in the previous report.

The risk of kidnapping seems to be a new one.

It used to be mentioned by 2% of the respondent 4 years ago.

Now it's mentioned by 18% of the respondent.

Almost one out of five claim that the journey involved that risk of kidnapping.

A new risk has emerged over the last four years is the risk of arbitrary expulsion.

We've seen waves of arbitrary expulsion from North African countries to neighbouring countries.

Again, we don't want to say to a country that he does not have the right to expel or to deport someone.

It can be done, but it needs to be done with the appropriate legal safeguards.

What we see is the rounding up of people based on criteria that are not always clear on those people are then dump across the border, sometime of 1 country, sometime of several countries, but doesn't mean the problem is solved.

So again, in terms of migration on asylum management, this is not, this cannot be a response.

Finally, I think I'll, I'll, I'll leave it to other colleagues to to speak about the methodology on some of the findings.

It was also surprising for us to see that actually the the smugglers on the traffickers were not necessarily the main perpetrators of violence from what the respondent to the survey said.

You know, we have this thinking that you know, they are the they are the troublemakers on on the route.

In fact, it turns out it's more criminal gangs that can sometime include traffickers, but the perception by migrants on refugee, these are criminal gangs operating and it's also law enforcement authorities, non state actors which are normally armed groups abusing of the people on the way.

I think I leave it here just that with a dose of realism, I have to say I'm not happy with what I'm reading because I thought we had done better in trying to provide services along the route.

So it's a cause for not only concern, but it's a call for action by all.

We, we cannot lose our capacity to to get outraged by this level of violence along the route.

Some of it is can be addressed and we can't go to a risk 0.

But there has to be some better response on some parts of the routes on better border management, which has become the, you know, the, the, the, the, the, the shortcut that many states are are using in saying that's the way to fix it.

Well, better border management cannot be a justification for that level of violence along the route.

It has to come with proper referral, proper services and proper accountability for those causing that violence along the route.

Thank you.

Thank you, Vance.

Let's go over to Lawrence for some remarks.

Thank you so much and good afternoon from from my side.

First of all, I'm delighted to to be part of this, of this IOM being part of this study, which only highlights the importance of data, data collection.

But there is a, there is a flip side to this.

We're becoming addicted.

We're becoming addicted to data, to to tragedies, to numbers and not to the, to the stories, unfortunately to the violence that people experiment on their skin.

And this is a little bit the sad part because as much as we we can increase the collection of, of data, there is an importance that people do not get used to this kind of these kind of phenomenons.

Now when it comes to obviously to to dated numbers that might be of interest, I would say that in 2024, we have already experienced stories at least collected, reported eight, 870 deaths.

That means 5 deaths per day.

And this is largely unestim, this is underestimated, I'm sorry.

Because a lot of the challenges that we have also in data collection while on on the northern shore of the Mediterranean, there are ways of collecting informations in more systematically and more in depth.

Obviously, there are challenges when it comes to collecting data in on the other shore of the Mediterranean, let alone in, in the Sahel, in the Sahel region.

So this leads us to say that there's this number obviously does not capture the entirety of the of the problem of the issue of, of people, victims of violence and all the abuses that Vincent has just referred to deaths.

The Central Mediterranean continues to be the the deadliest route.

And you know, there are, and, and I'm also quite surprised when you know, in an era in where access to media, to social media, to information, that there is still a very **** number of people taking the risks of embarking on dangerous, very dangerous journeys.

Obviously, there's a lot of people do not choose to move, but they are pushed because of various situation, political conflict, instability and, and whatnot.

However, the the misinformation still subsists and we know and we experience that often times smugglers and traffickers have a very capable way of communicating and enticing migrants and showing them how things can be easy.

The price can be low, but then it turns out to be a nightmare.

So there is indeed a challenge towards an industry, those of smugglers and traffickers, which needs to be ramped up because it is illicit economy, one of the highest illicit economies in in the world, which is then the, the, the revenues are reinvested in other illegal activities, which creates A vicious, A vicious circle.

So hence the importance of looking at how we tackle the capability of communication that smugglers and traffickers have over their their victims.

It was quite interesting how the information that at hand of many people coming from sub-Saharan Africa differ very considerably even if they come from the same village.

Some people are under the impression that the the process of migrating irregularly is relatively easy, at least what the smugglers and traffickers say to them.

What does the report also highlight implicitly and explicitly?

I think it highlights the needs to step up protection responses along the route.

This cannot be done individually by one single agency, or by two agency or by three agency.

It needs really a whole of society approach, but obviously we are together with the with the UN agencies that are along the route able to synergize increasingly in order to step up these protection responses.

So IOM traditionally offers a number of of services and and I don't want to hear make a list of services that I am offers, but it is important for you to be in the picture.

So assisted voluntary return is one of those and voluntary humanitarian return as one of those tools that IOM offers to migrants, either it who are experimenting a life risk, but also for those people who have realised that their migration project didn't didn't work.

And in that respect, IOM has been active worldwide, but especially from Libya, Tunisia and neighbouring other countries, Algeria to step up support to assisted voluntary return and reintegration.

Also working on alternatives to detention.

Alternatives to detention are crucial because migrants should not be put into detention illegally and lawfully and they should be offered alternatives.

So this is something which is emerging, still not systematic, but in some countries I think some headway is being made.

Trafficking is also another phenomenon which is ****.

Unfortunately, the the traffickers are very, very capable and smart of avoiding controls and and cheques.

So agencies like IOM work closely on case management on on many and hundreds of thousands of of cases of victims of trafficking are the 2 are the two elements that I would like to highlight that the report calls for is looking at how do we improve responses, not just as IOM, obviously, but as a society.

First of all, it's it's important to look at how to regularise or legalise migrants in countries of transit if there is a need, for example, but also further afield when it comes, for example, in European countries, responding to the need, for example, for talents and for manpower in in countries of destination.

Opening up regular channels is indeed not the silver bullet, but certainly an enabler.

Another one, another element, another pillar on which migration governance hinges on.

So I'll leave it at that.

But there is obviously plenty of other details that we can carry forward subsequently.

Thanks.

Thank you, Lawrence and Brown, over to you.

Thank you very much.

Thank you all for joining us today.

And let me also start by thanking our two partner organisations, UNHCR and IOWAN for the excellent cooperation 4 years ago.

Vinson referred to this as well when UNHCR and MMC presented the 1st edition of this report at the launch here at Triple AI said this is not the first report outlining all these abuses and sadly, I'm afraid it won't be the last.

And I also said that it should be the last, and I sincerely hope we won't sit here again in a year's time and present another report with all these statistics on the incredible and unacceptable levels of ***** as refugees and migrants are facing all along these routes.

End of quote.

Yet here we are, not one year later, but four years later.

And during those four years, again, there have been many other reports as well documenting what's happening along these routes by each of our organisations and also by other agencies.

So honestly, I really do not want to be here and I think we should not be here presenting yet another report presenting yet again the unimaginable levels of violence refugees and migrants are facing on these routes.

It is really unacceptable.

And as we say in the foreword to this report, this remains sustained on our collective conscience.

In the previous foreword, we said this report adds to a mounting evidence base that can no longer be ignored.

So the question is, has it been ignored?

And maybe ignored is not the right word as it it certainly has not been ignored by by us and by many other organisations and many other people who are trying to help migrants every single day along these routes.

But I think it has been ignored in the sense that it has not gotten any better.

On the contrary, possibly.

And of course, it's, it's difficult to compare this in a fully representative and mythologically reliable way how the situation has changed.

But I think that's even a little bit beyond the point at this stage when we present this report.

And of course, I'm, I'm representing a, a research organisation.

So I could talk here about the methodology and about the research and about the data and comparing the different percentages, but in a way I really don't want to, I want to talk about the people.

This report is not about data.

Ultimately, it's about people.

For a previous report, when some mentioned it as well, we, we interviewed 16,000 people.

For this report, we interviewed 31,500 people.

And this report is also not about their their status or the labels that we may put on them.

It's about the individual human beings.

It's men, women, fathers, mothers with family and friends behind them on their way to find safety, on their way to find better opportunities for themselves, their families, to find freedom from whatever it is that makes them unable, unable to live a free life where they are.

And our people are enumerators as as MMC on the ground.

We're stationed in so many different migration hubs along these routes.

Sit down with them every single day, talk to them and conduct long in depth surveys to collect all this, this information every single day.

And we are really grateful to all these people, these 31,500 refugees and migrants who took time to share their very personal experiences with us.

And while they're on their way, they face these unacceptable levels of violence or even they may lose their their lives, as as Laurent said as well just last week.

And this is a route we haven't covered in this report, but just last week we heard that 5000 people died on the Atlantic route to the Canary Islands in the first five months of this year.

That's an increase of 700% compared to the same period last year.

And we also know, even though we don't have fully accurate numbers, and indeed it is an underestimation that countless others die on the land routes up to the Mediterranean coast, possibly even more than at sea.

So this is really one important notion from this new report that I would like to highlight is that we should not forget about what's happening on the land routes, on these routes through the desert.

And we really need to increase our capacity for search and rescue in the desert on these land routes.

Another keyword coming from this report, also mentioned already by the other panellists is accountability.

So this report also explores who are the perpetrators of violence and common perpetrators are smugglers.

They are among the perpetrators other criminal groups, but also as Fin Sang alluded to, state officials like police, military and and border guards.

But whoever they are, whichever category, they should be held accountable.

But at the moment much of this is happening in a situation of near complete impunity.

So even though there has been a little bit of progress, I would say compared to the previous report, we have seen that a few **** profile traffickers who are operating out of Libya have been arrested.

But we need much more of that and I think we need to stop going after the very low level pickup drivers in Niger for example.

But we should really follow the money and catch the big guys and the ones that are directly responsible for all this violence.

What we also need to change is the dynamics in the current migration partnerships that we see between Europe and third countries.

I think Europe has a lot to offer in exchange for cooperation on migration management, legal migration pathways, access to trade markets, Development Corporation.

And I think in exchange, it should be able to say that adherence to the highest human rights and protection standards is something that is non negotiable in these partnerships.

Yet it seems that the fear of migration across Europe sometimes maybe stands in the way of being able to explicitly call out what's happening along these these routes.

And I think that's simply unacceptable.

Finally, we need a hall of route approach.

And I'm not saying Hall of route in the sense that we we that it might sometimes be understood by some which could be translated as let's stop migrants as far as possible from Europe as possible and as early on the route as possible.

I'm saying all of route in the sense that at every step of the way and through cooperation between countries, between international and local organisations, at all levels, national levels, regional levels and importantly also the local and city level, we ensure that people all along these routes are able to exercise their rights.

They are protected, they have access to assistance and they see alternatives to onward irregular movement so that they are able to make a deliberate choice, a deliberate personal choice about whether to move on or not.

Finally, just to briefly bring things back to the global governance of migration, in 2018 the Global Compact for Migration was adopted.

It includes Objective 7, address and reduce vulnerabilities in migration and it includes Objective 8, save lives.

And I think when it comes to these mixed migration routes across Africa towards Europe that are covered in this report, we have to conclude that we're failing on these objectives and that we have to do better.

I started by saying I didn't want to be here and that we should not need another report, but apparently we do.

I think that's quite clear from this report.

And even if this report doesn't necessarily present a new picture, that is a concerning finding in and of itself.

And imagine we would say, well, you know, we know all of this already from the previous report, from other reports.

That's not do another report.

I think that would mean that we're basically giving up it.

It means we would accept the situation as it is.

It means we would normalise it.

But we don't accept it and we should never accept it.

And as Vincent said as well, we should never get used to it.

So while again repeating what I said last time, I sincerely hope we won't be sitting here again with another report.

We will if we need to.

And meanwhile, I know that people on the ground are doing every day the best they can, people working for our organisations and many other organisations to provide better protection for people on the move.

But I hope that this report will also help a little bit, not least by convincing our leaders, our politicians, our policy makers to help develop better policies and shape an environment that leads to the end of this unacceptable violence that refugees and migrants are facing.

Thank you, Thank you, Bram and thanks to everyone who were who were joining us online and in person.

Just to remind everyone though that the name of the report is on this journey.

No one cares if you live or die.

And it's about *****, protection and justice for long routes between East and West Africa and Africa's Mediterranean coast, taking a route based perspective on key risks.

So we'll open up the floor for questions if we can perhaps just ask questions to be kept to the scope of the report obviously and its contents and, and the discussion here that we've heard from our panellists today.

And we'd also just ask that when you do ask your question, if you can just state your name and your affiliation and, and also specify which of the, the panellists that you'd like to direct your question to.

So I believe we, we did have Jamie first, but then we'll come back.

Jamie, go ahead.

I have three questions actually.

I'm sorry.

The 1st is you say in the report that roughly that the deaths of refugees and migrants in the desert presumed to be double those happening at sea.

Yet the figures that I saw in your report say, if you want to bear with me one second, I have it.

You have a total 1100 and 800, sorry, 1180 persons are known to have died while crossing the Sahara Desert for the period January 2020 to May 2024.

That's very much less than a single year even on the Med.

So how are you getting to that number of double the number of deaths on on the Sahara crossing?

So please elaborate on that.

The second point is you also mentioned some comments about genital harvesting or mutilation or I'm sorry, what was the organ trafficking could organ removal?

Could you, could you elaborate who is doing that and what does that involve exactly?

Is that a wide scale problem or is that just a piece meal?

And then finally, my third question goes directly to Mr Frou because you just raised the question that I wanted to ask you based on the comments you just made, you say I think we need to stop going after the very low level pickup drivers in Niger, for example, but we should really follow the money and catch the big guys.

Who do you want to do that?

Who will do that to go after the big guys?

And who are those big guys?

Thanks for your first question regarding death summer, the Sahara.

I don't know Von Sant or Lawrence.

Yeah.

The the problem is we cannot give you statistics on on precise statistics on death on land because there's nobody collecting the body in the desert.

For everyone crossing the Sahara, you get a testimony of bodies being seen being dropped.

And there the smugglers get rid of people and there people fall off the truck simply and they don't, they don't pick them up.

Other people get sick on the pickup and they drop them in the desert and abandoned them.

So everyone that has crossed the Sahara can tell you of people they know who died in the desert.

Whereas you interview people in Lampedusa.

Not that many people will tell you about people they know was died at sea.

Some know of shipwrecks, but we have better knowledge of shipwrecks because there are people collecting the bodies when when the shipwreck is taking place close to the close to the shore of of the Mediterranean.

So that's an estimate.

It's not hard data, but it's based on on personal testimonies of the people.

I know it's not satisfactory as an answer because we would like to be able to compare the odd data we have on on the deaths at sea with hard data we would have on death in the desert.

We don't have that data and you have many deaths in detention centre, official or unofficial ones that are not accounted for either.

On the issue of sales of organs, it's happening in at least two countries covered by this report.

Don't want to be too specific.

These are criminal people doing that.

Sometime the there is some sort of concerned by the person that to sell one organ, but most of the time just out of survival strategy to live in a in a difficult environment.

But most of the time people are drugged.

They, they, they and and the organ is removed without their concern.

They wake up on on one kidney is is missing.

And so that's not a new problem, but that's a problem taking place.

Who are those people?

Who are the traffickers?

Well, they are.

They are list of known traffickers circulating among states.

Many are known and many seem to be out of reach.

So when you discuss with states sometime it's either the level of evidence that they think is not sufficient, either they don't get the cooperation of the states where they put their money.

So they can't get that, that evidentiary chain to document, you know the criminal proceed from the trafficking, although they are untouchable for some reasons when you look at the European Union, it or the United Nation for the last, since the last report, there has been no new traffickers put on the list of sanctioned traffickers for any of the four situation where the UN as a function as a sanction regime along this route which is Sudan, Somalia, Libya and Mali.

Whereas there are no new actors in terms of trafficking.

The old one have retired.

They have diversified their their business portfolio, they have reinvested in the legal economy or at least the legitimate economy, their criminal proceed and they have handed over that portfolio to to others new players.

But sometime they they're just untouchable.

Yeah, Bram, did you want to 1st go to Jamie's comment as well on the trafficking?

Yeah, sure.

Thanks for the question.

Very briefly, not too much to add to what Vincent was saying, but in terms of, I mean, and caveat, I'm not a law enforcement expert, but what this requires is really cooperation between states.

There are some good examples of the two that I mentioned that are currently in gaol in the Netherlands resulting from a good cooperation between Italy, the Netherlands, Interpol, Europol.

So this really requires intense international cooperation, of course, with the national authorities of the countries where these people are operating.

But it's extremely difficult, of course, to get the right evidence.

It's difficult to get testimony from victims as well and to find them.

And these are, I mean, in some of these cases, these are multinational networks.

One of them was arrested in Sudan.

They've been an arrest in the United Arab Emirates.

So this requires deep and and long investigations.

It's Vincent said.

Some are known, some might be not known yet, but should become known as soon as possible so that they can be held accountable.

Is that a follow up question?

If I could just follow up on what Monsieur Cushtel had said, you so you mentioned that sometimes the people do it voluntarily, that they have their organs removed.

Are they using that?

First of all, broadly, I didn't think I heard you say a number.

Do you have a number of cases like Lotto de Gondo Don Pali?

Like what are what are the numbers of cases?

And just are people selling the organs to pay their way to go up?

Is that literally the way it works or is that for some or just to get funds?

And what percentage of are those are voluntary and what you're involuntary?

I, I don't have that level of data and I can't remember at the top of my mind the percentage of respondent who were knowledgeable, who were either victims or at seen that risk of organ removal.

People do it normally not to pay for the, for the continuation of the journey.

It's just to survive surplus where they are or it's quite amazing in some countries, you know, it's widely advertised.

You have you seem to have all sorts of organs available for for transplant.

And whereas in some countries it's it's really missing and you wonder how some countries are able to attract so much organs and others don't, don't have the same capacity.

But I'm not an expert.

I'm not the one who is going to to go deeper into that, but sorry, How many people?

They certainly.

How many people are talking about hundreds.

More than thousands, But there is a market for that.

Thank you.

And we can go to Christiane and then Christophe.

Yeah.

Christiane, over to you.

Hello.

My name is Christiana with the German Press Agency.

Mr Korte, can you please name the two countries that you said were involved in this problem?

My basic question is, we all see in European countries, Netherlands, France, Germany, we all see the populace and the right wing parties coming to the fore.

They use exactly the narrative that you describe.

They're stocking fear of migrants.

And they would also probably respond, the more you help along the routes, the more you encourage migration.

And Mr Costello, you, you said that's not what we do, but it's not enough to just say that's not what we do.

What would be a good response and what would be a positive suggestion to European governments beyond?

You need to cooperate more, you need to find agreements.

I mean a really concrete response to the people in in remote French villages who seem to be afraid of migrants or in in East Germany who who are going into the streets and say stop all these migrant flows.

Thank you.

OK, thank you.

I can share maybe the response with Lawrence on that one.

I think we understand the concern of some communities because sometime, you know, migration, asylum is not properly managed in Europe and it is disproportionately affecting some countries.

And within those countries, some communities, you know, there is no, there's not always solidarities between cities, not all of them are exposed to the same reality on a daily basis.

So we need to rethink a bit the social contract between the state on the, on the, on the municipalities, on that issue of management of migrants, on refugee in general.

That's part of the solution.

But to address your concern, you know, the sort of services we provide with IOM and many other partners along the route are, are basic services to it's humanitarian assistance.

It's not, it's not transportation to to move to another place.

There are people no matter what you do, what you see, the information you provide them, they will continue to move.

They've made-up their mind.

You won't change their mind.

We estimate it's not in the report, but we estimate on some other recent survey we have carried out, it's about 20% of the population.

Those you know, they won't believe you, they won't trust you.

They have one destination in mind and they will try by all means, those who can't do much about, about their their desire to move, even if it's unrealistic, even if it's very dangerous.

But for many, they underestimate the risk.

Even if they claim they know the risk, they underestimate the risk because those risks are downplayed, as Lauren said, by the smugglers, those who are selling the dreams, But also they are downplayed sometime by the diaspora, by their friends who have done the the same journey and all that.

So our responsibility is to provide them accurate information on providing accurate information is not facilitating irregular movement.

It's about informing people about about the risk.

When we know about those risks that are in the report, we have a duty to inform and we have a duty to try to provide with states alternative to those dangerous journeys.

It's in the interest of the protection of those people, the way to address that in the public opinion in Europe.

Today's again to, to, to, to remind people that the majority of migrants on, on refugees are, are not moving on the war to Europe.

They are staying within Africa.

They're moving within neighbouring countries.

The vast majority stay, I mean, it's almost 70% stay in the country next to their country of origin.

So this myths or this fear that they are all going to come, no, you don't change your graphy.

Some people will continue coming by sea, by land, because that's human nature.

It has always been like that.

What we can do is better manage that.

But to say we're going to ignore those protection problem and those protection problem will be a deterrent for people from moving, well, no, we see it four years after.

It's not a deterrent.

The risk seems to be higher and people keep moving.

But why do they move?

Because also some people tell us it's more dangerous to stay than to move.

So we we need to go beyond the data and tell tell the story before the boat.

Over to you, Lawrence.

Thank you, Vincent.

It opens up a really interesting conversation.

I will keep it at addressing one of the points that you raised.

You know, the concerns of the host communities nowadays in being in Germany or being in every in in any other country.

I think this is nothing new.

It happens.

It happened all the time, even with internal migration.

I grew up in an Italian city which experienced a lot of internal migrants coming from the South.

And at the time, you know, there was really racism against the these people coming from the, from the South of Italy, even to the point that they were saying do not, we're not, we do not rent to southerners.

So that is inherent in our human being.

We are fearing there's something new we don't know.

We don't master that kind of a novelty that is coming our way in in our societies.

What can be done?

Well, first of all, there is a disconnect in the narrative.

You hear a lot of a lot of negative and toxic discourse coming especially from central levels of governments.

But if you look then at local authorities, for example, municipalities, mayors, governors, you will see a different narrative in many countries of of destination.

An important Italian mayor of whom I spoke to the other few weeks ago, he said migrants for us are not beneficiaries, Migrants are assets.

If this city does not provide and offer access to services, to housing, transport, health, this city will collapse.

So there is a disconnect on the value of what migrants can and people can bring, you know, being refugees as well bring to the, to the societies of, of destination.

And this is also compounded by the need of the private sector to fill increasing gaps in, in their, in, in, in the, in the work sector, in the, you know, talents and, and, and manpower.

It is, it's not a secret that the birth rate, the declining birth rate in many European countries is a pull factor for many migrants trying to, to, to look at the new opportunities.

And at the same time, it's an ageing versus an ageing N.

You see a youthful S which is obviously increasing in terms of numbers of people who are putting themselves in the market.

So I think there is there is a lot to do in in working on the narrative.

I think it is important to frame this discussion in in a way that people are not terrified by the words disembarkations, invasion, because that just resonates negatively.

People feel threatened at that point, you know, and they don't understand while people probably are coming because they are in need of international protection because there there is an opportunity for them to fill certain gaps which are no longer service to provided by the by the nationals.

I'll leave it at that.

Thank you Lawrence.

We'll sorry get the two countries to name the two countries with the organ.

Sorry I can't name them.

You just do Google search, where can I where organs are vest, where migrants, where migrants are selling their organs.

Just do a Google search, you'll find those countries.

Sorry.

OK, I'm, I'm sorry.

We've also got just 10 minutes left.

We'll take a question first from Christophe in the room and then I do see colleagues online as well.

So we've got two more questions on the platform, but first to Christophe.

Christophe, I just had a question on the practise that you were talking about, search and rescue operations, for example, in the in the desert where most of the people die and there is no infrastructure like we always hear about the the boats that are, that are trying to save people crossing the Mediterranean.

Is there anything comparable in place or that could be put in place to because I read the testimonies in the reports of the the the journeys are just absolutely horrendous and horrible.

So I was just wondering if there is anything, any equivalent in terms of search and rescue that we see on on sea at sea.

Thank you.

Yeah, the best example I have is is Djibouti where the authorities are running a search and rescue programme along the coastal shore, but on the on the land side and on the routes leading to to Ethiopia and on the on Somalia.

And so there is a proper force established to do that.

So the search is difficult and because you you would need higher your assets that that exist in the central Med but that do not exist in the desert.

But they rely on the information they get from from local authorities sometime for people who have passed through the through those routes and they normally bring those they rescue to a centre, a migrant resource centre operating by IOM in a place called OBOC.

For us, that's a very good practise that that needs to be replicated elsewhere.

In the past, IOM also helped Niger Gendarmerie Nos of Agades on that route leading to Libya some time to to pick up people that had been abandoned by smugglers.

From what I understand that has stopped as a programme, but that's really needed along all those routes because you know, in our in our mind, Agades is north of Niger.

Actually when you look at the map of Niger, Agades is in the centre of Niger.

There is still halfway to go to go to, to Libya, all the way from from Niami to Agades is only half of the way to go to, to Libya.

So vast wraths of land that needs to be that needs to be patrol.

But there again, technology could help, but there is absolutely no investment on, on, on search and rescue on land.

We need that in, we need that in some parts of Mauritania, we need that in some parts of Mali South of Algeria.

I mean, there are many of those black spots where the danger are acute and where where states should should make more significant efforts.

Thank you.

Let's go to Emma online.

Emma, over to you.

Thank you, Emma Faj from Reuters.

I just wanted to clarify on the death toll please, which my colleague Jamie mentioned.

I know it's not exact science, but is it fair to assume then that it's about double the 7115 on the Mediterranean routes, the water routes?

And is that a new finding in this report?

And would Mr Koshtel clarify which countries have been dumping migrants across their borders?

And finally, a kind of broader policy question, given what you were saying, Mr Koshtel, about the abusers often not being the smugglers but in fact state actors or gangs, what are the policy implications of that?

The European Union seems to always talk about smugglers.

So in a way, do they have the wrong target?

Is that a mistake in policy?

Thank you.

OK, I'll, I'll take the first, the first, the first part, which is based on the Missing Migrants project, which is a tool which tracks incidents involving migrants, including refugees and asylum seekers who have died or gone missing in the process of migration towards an international destination.

And since 2014, this project has recorded the deaths of, oh, just over 66,000 people.

And the remains also, what comes out of the missing migrants project is that the remains of approximately 27,000 people lost their lives during migration have not been recovered.

And the final one is that the most deadly route is the Central Mediterranean route, where at least 23,600 people have died since 2014.

This is the information that I have at hand.

The other question was about the state carrying expulsion, arbitrary expulsion, which are collective expulsion of people.

These are not individual person that are expelled, but large group of people that are expelled where it's mainly Tunisia and Algeria and to a lesser extent Libya.

What Europe needs to do about yeah recalibrating its policy regarding those creating or perpetrating those protection problems along the route.

Well, it's, it's part of that dialogue on migration partnership that needs to be principle on based on what Bram said, the highest respect for, for human rights.

Any migration management deal with a third country that would not be accompanied with with those safeguards is likely to lead to to more expulsion push backs.

But he doesn't solve the problem not only creates problems for the people concerned, they suffer where they are dumped and some lose their life in the desert during the expulsion process, as we've seen recently.

But he doesn't solve the problem because those people end up somewhere someone has to cater for the needs of those people.

And it cannot just be the the the same states always being used as the dropping zone or the dustbin for unmanaged migration policies.

Thank you, Vincent.

What we'll do is we'll take two more questions from the platform, but one after the other and then we'll we'll open up.

Actually, before we do that, I think Bram wants to make a comment.

Over to Bram.

Thank you.

No, I just want to comment on the last question about smugglers by Emma.

I think what we're really missing a debate on on smugglers is nuance.

We see really a narrative being pushed by by European policy makers, for example, that smugglers are the ones that are luring people into irregular migration journeys.

We have asked approximately 40,000 people what influenced your decision to migrate.

Smugglers roughly come in 7th place.

So there's a lot of other factors that that basically informs people's decision to migrate irregularly is not so much to smugglers.

And it's similar with the notion about smugglers as being the main perpetrators of violence.

Yes, there are places where they are the main perpetrators of violence.

There are also places where there are not.

There are benign smugglers that simply help people, maybe even to find safety by helping them move across the border.

There are also smugglers that ***** people that that violate people's rights.

So I think what we're missing here is a much more nuanced portrayal of the role of smugglers, but also of the rate of the role of state officials.

And that one is a much more difficult discussion perhaps to have also with national authorities that among their, their employees, there are people who are misbehaving themselves towards refugees and migrants.

But then again, there are many that are, are just doing their job in a, in a, in a proper way with adherence to human rights standards.

So I think this lack of nuance is, is really what we're seeing in this this European debate on on smugglers.

And I think part of this is also that constantly pushing for a criminalised response to smugglers, blaming the smugglers functions as a bit of a smokescreen in a more sort of generic approach against irregular migration.

But I think it's it's sort of hiding some of the real facts that that are happening on the ground.

Thank you from so if we can, if we can open up the mic for Jeremy 1st and then Nikolai.

Jeremy, your question, please.

Thank you, Sabia.

My.

So the.

Thank you, Jeremy.

Let's go to Nikolai and then we'll we'll take the answers.

Nikolai, yes, hi, I'm Nicola Nielsen, EU Observer.

I just want to pick up on on Bram's comments on smugglers.

I mean, every few years the European Commission comes out with declarations that and strategies on its intention to break the business model of smugglers.

I think this has been going on for at least 10 years now.

And I was wondering in the context of the report that that you that you presented today, to what extent have those strategies proposed by the European Commission to break the so-called business model of smokers been effective?

And yeah, thank you.

Thank you.

And I think we just have the last hand also from Emma.

So we'll take that question and then we'll sorry go to responses.

Emma over to you.

I'm not sure I remember maybe that's a remaining hand.

If not we'll we'll go straight and maybe then we start Vonsant do you want to go ahead and answer Jeremy's question.

We join me you know like perception on the the risk of with perception the risky of Bazzi Pascual de Jean Dupre performed with experimental men may perform with the team and don't like question what what analysis correct and dossium question excuse me.

Oh, Jordi en cor SE plu de Suez son porcion de Jean quiari van libi quidis avuaratan or destination final, you know para dentos Yun manier cesoniero Dun manier PLU durable medoxis said perception given two son bar queso set route por Leon Europe 18 exact the South Park a little plon de play reflection Migratwa the the shock person.

Yeah, they will see the ****** Ki Ki kit lamali.

For example, the block in a Bay we see Ki kit lazil omali parfaonial on the item on parfaon parlonisia pura Leo Mali to sort of the route parallel queso develop una de Sudanese Ki Ki tlochat Ki pass parlonisia econo tuva preo Maroc move more multi directional qui von scherche E refuge push the security Edu travel surely paid the the the Gulf of the Guinea.

They paid the West ESO la pavosi fair le experience.

The series could do protection and pronounce the route value Sud.

Thank you von Sant and Brown.

Would you like to take the question from Nicholai from EU Observer?

Yeah, sure.

Thank you for your question, Nikolai.

Yes, the notion of breaking the business model of smugglers is, is very much part of that narrative in Europe as well.

I think it's safe to conclude that Europe's migration policies have done the exact opposite and not breaking the business model of smugglers, but boosting the business model of smugglers.

Just a small comparison.

When we interview Afghans who reach Europe, more than 90% use the smuggler.

When we interview Ukrainians who've entered the European Union, 0% use the smuggler.

And of course, there's lots of caveats to that, to that comparison, and that would be a big discussion.

But I think it's clear what happens.

If people have safe and legal channels of moving, they don't need a smuggler.

If they don't, they need a smuggler.

And as long as Europe tries to close off all the routes, you might succeed to some extent closing the routes.

But there will always be new routes.

And especially with your geography, with its sea borders, with its proximity to locations where migrants and refugees are coming from, it's going to be pretty hard to physically close off the whole of Europe.

And that means smugglers will always find their their way, no matter how hard you crack down.

In fact, the harder you crack down, the higher the profits.

Thank you, Graham.

And I think that's all we have time for unfortunately today.

But we we will take any questions obviously bilaterally and online after the briefing.

And just to kindly remind everyone that the embargo does lift at 5:00 in the morning local time, Central European summertime tomorrow.

And just a reminder again, if you haven't got a copy of the report or you need any other information, do contact us.

But thank you for joining the briefing and for your interest in this very local subject.

Thank you and goodbye.